Navy Brief 1/18 January 2018

The UK politicians and senior military officers at the helm of defence these days, seem to excel at outpourings of Russian scaremongering soundbites, which the UK MSM are too willing to relay, without any discussion or any criticism. I’m kind of wondering if there isn’t something in the water in Whitehall, that has led to a rash of anti-Russian outbursts of late.

The prize needs to go to the 8 NATO countries that “(not including the United States) that will meet the alliance guidelines calling for members to spend 2% of their GDPs on the military. Those eight countries are Greece, Estonia, Turkey, Latvia, UK, Lithuania, Poland and Romania.” The prize is being sold US weaponry at eye waveringly prices, that don’t necessarily do all what was written on the box in the first place. (The Patriot missile system spring to mind) LINK

The primary driver for most of these countries to raise their military spending is: Russia. (I suspect that the Greeks & Turks aren’t increasing theirs just because of Russia). While at the same, Russian defence spending is decreasing, 10% less than what it was 2015 according to IHS Janes.

The UK sounding the alarm on a supposedly ‘revanchist Russia’ comes at a time when there is a shortage of Royal Navy destroyers and frigates, at come when two very costly aircraft carriers are being put into service and with an shrunken UK submarine fleet. Costs which have to come out from another part of the navy’s budget, with proposals to retire ships such as HMS Ocean, a helicopter carrier. LINK

When you consider, the inadequacies felt by NATO, US military forces, the US Navy fatal woes in 2017, I suppose having a suitably placed fear inducing opponent is handy, on both sides of the Atlantic. Handy to deflect those inadequacies away, especially in light of December’s US Strategy document that set out a change of heart on its security policy. LINK

Still, at ground level, it is hard to follow the trends of military pundits, planners and analysts, one minute, Russia’s only carrier is a “smoke belching Soviet relic”, then it yaws to the unseen menace of a “expanding Russian submarine threat”. Sadly they are playing to the MSM tune, readily giving them their 30 seconds of ‘breaking’ or hyper sensational news headlines, to new generations that have never know the Cold War. This line gets regularly quoted: “Russian naval activity is now at its highest levels since the Cold War.” LINK

I have yet to come across a justification or any meaningful evidence for this paltry quote. Its origins seem to stem from Vice Admiral Clive Johnstone, back in 2016,

[LINK] subsequently echoed by practically all of NATO high command. Repeated by Rear Adm. Andrew Lennon, NATO’s commander of submarine forces back in December. I’d say that he was certainly touting for more ASW business on the basis of a fallacious statement. He added that: “”Russian submarine activity is higher now in the last three years than it has been since the Cold War.” Is that 3 years concurrently or in succession?

Given the ravages experienced by the military in the Yeltsin era, most submarines were either rusting at the piers, or sold off to foreign client or scrapped. As such any slight increase in Russian submarine operations would be ‘the highest since the Cold War’. Hinting at the Cold War, assumes an oblique reference to the size of the Soviet Navy at that the time. The current Russian Navy is tiny compared to the Soviet Navy. Some of the submarines still in commission, were built in Soviet times. This is quite telling as the figures below show:

1991

2001

2011

2015

Strategic submarines

60

17

15

13

Tactical submarines

221

34

45

47

Up to 2010, the modernisation of the Russian naval industry was excruciatingly slow, it has picked up a little bit since then, but it is slow, compared to how the US and Chinese naval industries produce ships and submarines massively.

The head of the Russian Navy, Admiral Vladimir Korolev did speak in 2017 about the submarine force time at sea in 2016. At least he quoted an actual figure to back up his statement:

“Last year we reached the same level as before the post-Soviet period, in terms of running hours,” [….] “This is more than 3,000 days at sea for the Russian submarine fleet,” he added. LINK

3000 days for about 60 submarines of all types, equals 50 days on average, in a year roughly speaking. Actually you could cut down on the numbers of seagoing submarines, as some spend more time tied to a pier, than lets say, the latest Project 636 Varshavyanka class, busy somewhere in the eastern Mediterranean. Did a 280 Soviet submarine fleet only do around 3000 hours in the late 1980’s? Or was Admiral Korolev gently winding up NATO commanders?

NATO and the US don’t like having any competition, this is a scrappy turf contest for North Atlantic sea domination. The Russian military are acutely aware of the need to maintain the ‘Bastion strategy’, especially the Northern (flank) Bastion strategy, for for its SLBM submarine force. Oddly, I didn’t hear the same level of agitation about when Chinese submarines ventured into the Sea of Okhotsk back in 2013, (Moscow wasn’t too pleased apparently).

I mentioned Vice Admiral Johnstone earlier, well, this is what he had to say about the Russian submarines: they “have longer ranges, they have better systems, they’re freer to operate.” Resulting from “an extraordinary investment path not mirrored by the West.” So the current bout of fear mongering arises from the West being either complacent or smug about Russian military capabilities. In other words, the Russians weren’t considered a threat for a while. LINK

Today’s Russian Navy, is a tiny shadow of the once hugely powerful Soviet Navy, but has indeed focused most of its limited resources on its still strong submarine fleet. This is again reflected in the next round of the State Armament Program, (SAP), with a specific focus on deterrence and keeping the submarine building programme on track. The point here is that Russia regularly publishes its SAP, which is closely scrutinised by NATO planners, years ahead, so really there aren’t any sudden surprises, (unless you’re a MSM reporter or a NATO planner apparently).

The trend for either Russia ‘blaming’ or ‘bashing’ is getting desperate and shallow soundbites being bounced to and fro within NATO. The UK is taking the lead in the West at the moment, being totally pathetic, while Poland & the Baltic States are the champions in the east in whining about ‘aggressive’ Russia. But, recently, it seems to be part of much wider and persistent “drip drip” anti-Russia narrative, that spans across culture, sport, economics and military affairs. I feel that we cannot simply dismiss it as the ravings of some frustrated politicians and Staff officers, because of budgetary reviews and cuts.

Leave a Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to get more info on formatting

(1) Leave the name field empty if you want to post as Anonymous. It's preferable that you choose a name so it becomes clear who said what. E-mail address is not mandatory either. The website automatically checks for spam. Please refer to our moderation policies for more details. We check to make sure that no comment is mistakenly marked as spam. This takes time and effort, so please be patient until your comment appears. Thanks.

(2) 10 replies to a comment are the maximum.

(3) Here are formating examples which you can use in your writing:
<b>bold text</b> results in bold text
<i>italic text</i> results in italic text
(You can also combine two formating tags with each other, for example to get bold-italic text.)
<em>emphasized text</em> results in emphasized text
<strong>strong text</strong> results in strong text
<q>a quote text</q> results in a quote text (quotation marks are added automatically)
<cite>a phrase or a block of text that needs to be cited</cite> results in:a phrase or a block of text that needs to be cited
<blockquote>a heavier version of quoting a block of text...</blockquote> results in:

a heavier version of quoting a block of text that can span several lines. Use these possibilities appropriately. They are meant to help you create and follow the discussions in a better way. They can assist in grasping the content value of a comment more quickly.

and last but not least:
<a href=''http://link-address.com''>Name of your link</a> results in Name of your link

(4)No need to use this special character in between paragraphs:&nbsp;You do not need it anymore. Just write as you like and your paragraphs will be separated.The "Live Preview" appears automatically when you start typing below the text area and it will show you how your comment will look like before you send it.

(5) If you now think that this is too confusing then just ignore the code above and write as you like.

Comment

Name:

E-mail:

44 Comments

In contest for control of earth island (Heartland, aka the main land mass, Eu Asia, and also Africa) the Sea Peoples (essentially the anglosaxon empire) depend on sea supply, as did the Persian at Salamis. Thus concentration of submarine forces, and “coastal defenses” – which have a range of maybe 1000 miles and may be sited far inland on small ships and barges, even fishing boats, makes good sense. Thus Ru and Chin too naturally develop these by-nature defensive machines and tactics. Not, mind you, that the poor sods being welcomed by defensive incoming are going to feel like it’s defense…

Brits do not need to fear Russia. Compare the size of Britain to the size of Russia. Russia has oil, gas, gold, diamonds, minerals, etc. Britain has all that ? To the Russians Britain is basically a dangerous nuisance, nothing more as military matters go. However, as far as financial matters go, it’s a different game, as London is the center of the Rothschild’s banking empire, which would like to see Russia broken up and plundered. No such luck. Those days are gone. Now the elites in the West are facing financial and economic difficulties, looking into possible break ups of both the EU and NATO, while Russia and China have created an economic partnership which id doing more than well, producing the BRICS, The Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the Eurasian Economic Union. The elites did not plan it that way.

And they looked all the time the other way, if they were not actually asleep at the wheel at all times. For example, the American collusion with the Islamists, supposedly to fight Communism by unleashing them on USSR, goes back to Eisenhower’s presidency. But they were not capable to understand that the Muslim Brotherhood was more interested in spreading its Islamist agenda than fighting communism, deluding themselves that they would ever impress the Islamists with America’s spiritual and moral strength!

British infrastructure is decrepit and poorly maintained. Electric cable is 40 years old and not replaced as under CEGB. UK is living off substance because privatised utilities have cut maintenance budgets.

What we have is cheap political rhetoric directed both against Russia and domestic audiences. NATO needs a enemy in order to justify it’s existence, while the military industrial complexes in the US and Europe need customers, namely NATO and foreign buyers. However, one big problem. The military costs a huge amount of money, while military alliances probably even more. The money needs to be provided, and this can only be done at the expense of civilian infrastructure. Not wise.

The US Defense budget is ostensibly “only” 700 billion dollars, yet analysts place it at between 1 trillion and 1,2 trillion dollars. After all, those 700 combat bases and 300 supply bases which the US has outside America need to be maintained, not to mention ongoing wars.

The problem for NATO is that it belongs to the history books. It should have been disbanded in 1989, then the Warsaw Pact collapsed. It was kept on, the Western elites hoping to push it against Russian borders. NATO was joined by the EU, which is nothing more than a civilian component of NATO. The elites in the West were hoping to destabilize Russia, after which NATO would move into Russia to guarantee “human rights”, introduce “democracy” and after that break up Russia in the name of “democracy”, so that it could be plundered by Western banks and corporations. It did not come to that. The coup d’etat against Yanukovich in Ukraine in 2014 was an attempt to bring Ukraine into the EU and NATO, so that NATO could place its missile systems right next to Russian borders, giving it an advantage in a potential nuclear confrontation. Worse, Russia would have been blackmailed, being given an ultimatum, either surrender or perish. Nothing came of this, although Poroshenko will almost certainly be forced by NATO to launch an attack against the Donbass either during presidential elections in Russia or during the World Cup, with NATO still hoping to arrive before Russian borders. Wishful thinking. The Russians in the Donbass are too well dug in, as they had three years to prepare. Ukraine will suffer another crushing defeat, with tremendous political repercussions inside Ukraine.

As for Russia, remarkable what it achieved with it’s limited military budget, which is some 8 -12 times smaller than that of the US. It has concentrated on missiles systems first and other weapons systems second. It has produced the S-300, S-350, S-400, S-500, the Topol, the Sunburn, the Kaliber and others, while its combat aircraft, like the SU-30, SU-34, SU-35, SU-37, SU-57, MIG-35 and MIG-41 are state of the art. It has upgraded it’s old tanks and introduced new ones, like the T-90 and the Armata. It has made great progress in electronics, like introducing the Khirbiny jamming systems. It’s slowly building up it’s Navy.

The point is that the Russian Military Industrial Complex is Government owned, while the US one is privately owned. This means Russia gets more for less money spent and the US gets less for more money spent. This explains Russia’s high tech achievements, which the West has trouble explaining, especially to domestic audiences, who want to know where all that money is going.

I trust NATO will not underestimate Russian high tech, especially since there are some crazies on Wall Street who think Russia can be defeated by a sneak attack. I trust NATO generals do not share that view, or do they ?

in the end it was the military that bankrupted rome
and caused its downfall
the same is already happening to nato as they
screech on about the russian “barbarians”
as their economies collapse under the immense debt
loads they have helped cause

” But, recently, it seems to be part of much wider and persistent “drip drip” anti-Russia narrative, that spans across culture, sport, economics and military affairs. I feel that we cannot simply dismiss it as the ravings of some frustrated politicians and Staff officers, because of budgetary reviews and cuts.”

I feel the same way.I see that constant attack as a way to demonize Russia to the Western public.In that way when the war comes the people will be worked up already.I don’t think there is any question anymore about “will” there be a war against Russia.Only “when” and to want lengths it will be fought.Will it “only” be conventional or be nuclear as well.Either way it will be for “all the marbles”,a life and death struggle for both sides.My thinking is Ukraine will be next on the list to start it.More so than Syria even.And possibly/probably in Feb. or March.

Yes, Poroshenko and Ukraine will be sacrificed for a war against the Donbass. Will NATO attack Russia, remains to be seen. I have been reading numerous analysis on this point. NATO is obviously analyzing this possibility. Will it be foolish enough to attack, remains to be seen. I presume it’s waiting to see what the results of Poroshenko’s attack on the Donbass will be. I have a nasty feeling that NATO will certainly get results, but in reverse, with Poroshenko and Ukraine ending up with a very nasty bill in the form of mass political dissent inside the country.

The way I see the US thinking,is they “win” either way.If Poroshenko attacks Donbass and are victorious they win. If the attack fails,they get to accuse Russia as the aggressor,and they win with propaganda.And get to sanction and demonize Russia more.Its a case of “win-win” for them.If I was advising Russia I would advise to end the Ukrainian aggression for good.If the Novorossian’s are able to regain their territory,they should free Ukraine itself.And install a a government in Ukraine that isn’t a stooge for the US.As the saying goes,”if you must do the time anyway,then make sure you do the crime”.The situation today is not working for either Russians or Ukrainians.Russia is constantly attacked over Ukraine.While Ukrainians must live under a murderous dysfunctional junta regime.Constantly threatening to attack Donbass and Crimea.As another saying goes,”they only need to win once to succeed ,while Russia must stop them from winning every time to stop from losing”.

I dont think we have to worry much. The Uk has been crippled by its own politicians and hardly needs anybody else to blow them over. Aircraft carriers with no planes? Subs that cant fire a rocket? Purrrlease.
We are mayby not too bright in the EU, but we hifgtened the intelligensia substantially by Britain excluding it self.
Britain will probably hit rock bottom levels (Amereican) in a decade.

UK is bust. They went mad on equipment with FRES sucking up all the Army budget for decades; F-35s sucking up RAF budgets; two flat-tops and Trident subs sucking up Navy budgets – all three are reducing manpower to compensate. They cannot even crew two a/cs let alone arm them. The last ship named HMS Prince of Wales was sunk 1941 by Japanese aircraft off Malaya – the new one is just as vulnerable.

They cannot afford the military despite freezing pay at 1% annual uplift. Equipment has busted them plus disasters in Iraq and Afghan and Libya. They cannot recruit men, retain men or train men so they appeal to women in the name of gender equality to make up numbers and discipline corrodes as Love Boat antics in Navy show.

Russia is building a professional military but has no capacity to wage the wars it was forced to wage after invasion by France, Germany, Japan etc. It gave up more territory peacefully in Europe than the US ever envisages – the US has only withdrawn when expelled as in France, Vietnam……..otherwise it stays and embeds itself as imperial garrison.

Russia has far too good an image nowadays for discredited politicians to tarnish. Putin is so much more modern than Brezhnev and Lavrov much more suave than Gromyko. Communism is gone and that was the threat to the West. It is the US that is the imperialist hegemon and all those crude Pravda cartoons suddenly look so true

The UK, together with the US, is a prisoner of private bankers, who control the banks. The UK is also a prisoner of NATO, the Praetorian Guard of private bankers, used for aggression and plundering, the recipients of the loot being banks and corporations, while the ordinary people get nothing.

As I have written before, it would be wise for Britain to leave NATO and sign a good trade deal with Russia, as Russia presents no danger to Britain. Why would Russia attack and invade Britain ? For what ?

However, leaving NATO is probably next to impossible for Britain, as the bankers would prevent it. They are still dreaming of breaking up and plundering Russia. Wishful thinking. Those days are gone.

No doubt it will end—eventually— due to the same constant undercurrent unless we have a collective major rethink and act upon the conclusions. Since there is little sign of that on the horizon, the major rethink may be forced upon us, rather than voluntarily undertaken.

I wonder if there is something else in all this scaremongering, especially in regards to infrastructure and data cables.

Maybe they try to set the stage for an economic collapse in the West and pre-frame Russia for it. A sudden collapse of the dollar for example, could bring chaos all over the West. Limiting internet access and exercise military control on the infrastructure would be among the first measures taken.

So, instead of saying that all this chaos is created by western greed and mismanagement, you simply say Russians did it, they cut the cables so there is no internet and we are now under military control because they attack our infrastructure.

I think you are getting close to the crux of the matter. The West has already started on the idiotic road of blaming Russia for all kinds of situations, from ‘election meddling’, ‘terrorism, (by saying that Russia created refugee problems), to stating that they are untrustworthy, by citing doping in sports. It’s being ratcheted up all of the time. We must not underestimate to how contrived the West will get, I’m just hoping that there isn’t malice shown on the part of the Russians. So far, no, yet malice and blind hate is doing the rounds of the West, with no checks.

For me and others, it is important to keep track of the ‘ball’, so to speak, everyone here who contributes to the The Saker does.

The US Army today is a mighty poor example, as compared to their army of 1944.

Perhaps their lordships have forgotten a few things… In W2 the American Army was really pretty good, and well supplied. After they landed in France they discovered that they had run up against a very tough foe.

They never speak of some of the things that happened, preferring prettier stories.

The US and Allies succeeded in invading France in 1944 only due to air superiority and the fact that they could attack and defeat the Germans when they had a 2:1 superiority in the field. They knew that the best the Germans had were better than their own. Also, the motivation of US troops to fight was not high, as they were fighting outside the US. This also applies today, when the US military can fight only if it has air superiority.

Yes,and remember that “millions” of the best troops and equipment the Germans had were fighting the Soviets.Even many of the German troops in France were there to fight the Americans because they had been rotated to France for rest and resupply from the eastern front.So they were available to fight when the US attacked.Had the Soviets not broken the German military over 3 years of horribly bloody war they would have had millions of their best troops.And much more equipment to throw against the Americans.I doubt the invasion would have succeeded.At least not nearly as easily as it did.

Yes. And due to a lack of imagination among the brass of the German intelligence – the front in the Normandy had been supported with gazoline via PLUTO – Pipeline Under The Ozean. German intelligence staff decrypted that akronym and issued warnings but the brass did not belief it until it was too late.

Your position is precisely the position espoused in the cited video…which had little to do with the invasion itself.

However you are mistaken about the invasion…the reason it worked.

It worked because the British ran the Nazi spy UK network 100% and established a massive fake and imaginary army to attack elsewhere…and a network of clerks to keep all the false intel coherent.

This operation is public knowledge, and I am surprised that you were evidently unaware.

Because Churchill held in his hand the ability to betray his own massive intelop, right up to the hours of the attack, and even past it, Hitler, fooled by false intel, failed to make the correct decisions during a critical phase…ie about 70 hours of so.

Thus D Day succeeded. If Churchill’s ploy had been betrayed the Red Army would have stood together with French Communists at the Normandy beaches, gazing at England…and then?

@LeDahu,
I agree with you totally. Particularly on the subject of Greece and Turkey. Turkey is building up its forces to grub Greek islands and the oil/gas fields, while Greece is preparing to defend itself from Erdogan fulfilling his dream of enriching himself and rebuilding the sultanate.

“Last year we reached the same level as before the post-Soviet period, in terms of running hours,” [….] “This is more than 3,000 days at sea for the Russian submarine fleet,” he added. LINK

3000 days for about 60 submarines of all types, equals 50 days on average, in a year roughly speaking.”

I think what the admiral meant there was that each individual submarine was spending as much time on operational duty as they were back during USSR days. The vessels were back up to the same level of activity vs port sitting as then.

Definitely agree about the build up of the propaganda war against Russia by the zionazis. They are returning to the late cold war level of goebbelsian psywar they maintained under their reagan colonial regime. Same eventual goal, too. Total world dominance through the destruction of Russia (though now they also have a much more effective China to bring down). The massive military revamp, the push for nuclear primacy, the abm strategy, the extreme psywar, full spectrum dominance ratcheted up into overdrive, the “winnable” nuclear war strategy, it’s the same.

Internally, it is the same story, as well, with further concentration of power and wealth into the hands of the oligarchy, while the rest of the people are saddled with debt slavery and a police state limiting their recourse of organization and action.

Michael Weiss is the Editor-in-Chief at the InterpreterMag.com. According to his Linkd profile, he is also a National Security Analyst for CNN since July 2017 as well as an Investigative Reporter for International Affairs for CNN since April 2017. He has been a contributor there since 2015. He has been a Senior Editor at The Daily Beast since June 2015.

Catherine A. Fitzpatrick is a Russian translator and analyst for the Interpreter. She has worked as an editor for EurasiaNet.org and the former Cold War project funded by the CIA, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL).
Pierre Vaux is an analyst and translator for the Interpreter. He’s also an intern. He is a contributor to the Daily Beast, Foreign Policy, RFE/RL and Left Foot Forward and works at Dataminr Inc.
James Miller’s bio at the InterpreterMag.com includes Managing Editor of The Interpreter where he reports on Russia, Ukraine, and Syria. James runs the “Under The Black Flag” column at RFE/RL which provides news, opinion, and analysis about the impact of the Islamic State extremist group in Syria, Iraq, and beyond. He is a contributor at Reuters, The Daily Beast, Foreign Policy, and other publications. He is an expert on verifying citizen journalism and has been covering developments in the Middle East, specifically Syria and Iran, since 2009. Miller also works for the U.S. Embassy in Kiev “diplo-page” the Kiev Post…

…The Interpreter is a product of the Atlantic Council. The Digital Forensics Research Lab has been carrying the weight in Ukrainian-Russian affairs for the Atlantic Council. Fellows working with the Atlantic Council in this area include:

Bellingcat – Aric Toler and Eliot Higgins- This linked article shows how an underwear salesman became one of the most important faces of the deep state. Don’t laugh, the image is really appropriate. Higgins’ insecurity runs so deep because of his failures that Higgins tries to get publications censured that question his author-i-tie.
Anne Applebaum – who has argued that Facebook should take responsibility for spreading fake news and help “undo the terrible damage done by Facebook and other forms of social media to democratic debate and civilized discussion all over the world.”
StopFake – Irena Chalupa – Chalupa is the sister to the same Alexandra Chalupa that brought the term Russian hacking to worldwide attention. Irena Chalupa is a nonresident fellow with the Atlantic Council’s Dinu Patriciu Eurasia Center. She is also a senior correspondent at RFE/RL, where she has worked for more than twenty years. Chalupa previously served as an editor for the Atlantic Council, where she covered Ukraine and Eastern Europe. Irena Chalupa is also the news anchor for Ukraine’s propaganda channel Stopfake.org She is a Ukrainian Diaspora leader. The Chalupas are the first family of Ukrainian propaganda. She works with and for Ukrainian Intelligence through the Atlantic Council, Stopfake.org, and her sisters Andrea (EuromaidanPR) and Alexandra.
Dimitry Alperovich – CEO of Crowdstrike and the person who consulted a Ouija board and guessed Russia may have hacked something, somewhere, sometime.
The strand that ties this crew together is they all work for Ukrainian Intelligence. If you hit the links, the ties are documented very clearly. We’ll get to that point again shortly, but let’s go further:

The great investigative journalist and founder of Consortium News Robert Parry DIED last night of a third stroke in the past month.

One of his last articles–about his stroke–and warnings about all sides distorting information for their own purposes are so important:

“My Christmas Eve stroke now makes it a struggle for me to read and to write. Everything takes much longer than it once did – and I don’t think that I can continue with the hectic pace that I have pursued for many years.

But – as the New Year dawns – if I could change one thing about America and Western journalism, it would be that we all repudiate “information warfare” in favor of an old-fashioned respect for facts and fairness — and do whatever we can to achieve a truly informed electorate.”

Our thoughts are with his family…and all of us who have lost a friend—a great speaker and writer of truth!

‘Total War’ Led by the U.S. and Russia’s Predicament over How to Respond.

by Gilbert Doctorow, Ph.D.

Amidst all the hullaballoo in U.S. media over alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential elections and ongoing threats to American democracy, the broad public may be forgiven for not noticing that the U.S.A. is day by day massively interfering in the Russian presidential campaign with a view to turning elites and the electorate against the front-runner, Vladimir Putin, and at the same time at discrediting the entire process. These are not allegations: they are verifiable facts that can be spotted in the daily news, but they go unobserved because they appear separately, each with its own separate plausible explanation, and the media never connect the dots. I have in mind such details as

the pending announcement on 29 January of new U.S. sanctions against Russian individuals and companies in implementation of the Russia sanctions law overwhelmingly passed by Congress last August, and said to be in response to a broad list of Russian offenses ranging from electoral interference and cyber attacks, to the occupation of Crimea and supporting the insurrection in south-eastern Ukraine (Donbas), to supporting the murderous regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria
the announcement that President Trump will receive in the White House anti-Putin presidential candidate, glamor television presenter and darling of U.S. freedom fighters Ksenia Sobchak
the expulsion of the Russian Olympics team from the forthcoming Games in Korea in retaliation for alleged systematic doping practiced in the Sochi Winter Olympics, followed by the ban a couple of days ago by the World Olympics Committee on individual Russian athletes without any explanation or justification whatsoever– athletes who just happen to be the highest rated among those who agreed to go in the Games as non-state participants, followed by a ban on fans showing the Russian flag in the venues of competition
the insistence by Rex Tillerson the other day that U.S. armed forces in Syria will stay there until the Assad regime goes, and that they are training what will be a 30,000 man force consisting of Kurds and Arabs located in the border region between Syria and Turkey, Syria and Iraq, all in violation of Syrian territorial integrity and sovereignty that Russia guaranties by word and by the full power of its military
the ongoing flow of U.S.-made lethal weapons and dispatch of trainers to Kiev that are part of a $350 million U.S. package of aid to back Ukraine’s still low level war against Russia

And while the American and European publics do not connect the dots, the Russians do so daily on their political talk shows watched by millions. They draw conclusions that are very important. Important because those conclusions define Russia’s reading of what they now openly call their “number one enemy,” the United States of America, the identification of its strengths and more particularly its weaknesses. These conclusions precondition and set limits on what the Kremlin can and should do to respond….

Leaving the conspiracy theories aside for a while, we can reach a conclusion. The forthcoming attack of the US establishment on Russian assets is likely to undermine the Old Money of the Yeltsin Oligarchs, and not only them. This confiscation will spell the death knell to the notorious Deal, and then we shall see Putin Unbound.

But perhaps it is too late for him. An unverifiable odd rumour has risen in Moscow. They say that the Communist candidate Pavel Grudinin has strong backing among the “siloviki”, that is Putin’s appointees, often but not exclusively of security services background, for they are unhappy with Putin’s adherence to the Deal. But that will be the subject of my next piece.

Two interesting articles. With even the anti-Putin polls showing him with at least 80% support in Russia. The upcoming elections remind me of “Goldilocks and the Bears”. Of the other no more than 20% in Russia that don’t support him fully,about 10% think Putin isn’t Socialist enough for them.While 7% think he isn’t Nationalist enough for them.The last 3% don’t see him as “liberal” (pro-Western) enough for them.Leaving the 80% thinking him “just right” for them.The US is “beating a dead horse” if they think pushing Sobchak is going to convince the 97% of non-liberals to change their minds.They are even crazier than I already consider them to be.

More desperate distraction than crazy.
The focus is more to keep the tired old anti-Putin meme going for domestic consumption that offer credible alternatives. Sobchak’s job is to generate some -ve msm images for nightly news cycles and ideally get imprisoned for the effort.

“On January 19, the tanker appeared to turn around in the middle of the Atlantic. France’s Engie company, which owns the tanker, has told Russia’s RBC newspaper that the turn was made due to bad weather.”

Odd the usa is importing gas from Russia when the usa wants Europe to stop importing gas from Russia and buy american gas instead. Perhaps the plan is for the americans to buy Russian gas for their domestic use and then sell their own gas to Europe? ;-D

It was only a mystery to media people, not us with a nautical background.

Nothing odd about actual global business transactions, the LNG spot market is like that. With thanks to a downturn in the LNG imports from Trinidad & Tobago to the US and the outcome of extreme cold weather State side.

Re 2nd paragraph. Well, that is in fact the plan, Vok Tak, to sell US Shale gas as LNG to the Baltic States, Poland and others. A number of contracts have been signed in this respect.

Running app Strava accidentally reveals the location of US military bases across the world and shows DRONES on a runway in leak of sensitive information that could aid terrorists
The Global Heat Map was published by GPS tracking company Strava last year
But it was only publicised recently the security concerns it raises were spotted
Map brings into focus lesser-known and potentially sensitive sites in war zones
It could provide information to someone who wants to attack or ambush troops

The common West (mainly US) still provokes Russia, rile the Bear up, this is not aclever idea, I believe.
UK is just US’s asskisser and these stupid words on Russia’s threat it’s just one more kiss.

We, here in Russia, already overflowed with despise and hate to that. The far it’s going the bigger risk of a clash and I can assure you – West probably won’t ask for some more fight, but it’ll be too late.

“China’s newly announced “Polar Silk Road” evokes the memory of President Vladimir Putin’s remark about the possibility to link the Beijing-led One Belt One Road project with Russia’s Northern Sea Route, which is likely to become one of major trade routes connecting Asia and Europe, RIA Novosti contributor Dmitry Lekukh writes.”

During the warmer months, yes, it would be a useful route. Article includes an infographic with some useful data, though it is centered around japanese-euro sea trade routing, rather than from China.

Sitemap

Saker Android App

An Android App has been developed by one of our supporters. It is available for download and install by clicking on the Google Play Store Badge above.

All the original content published on this blog is licensed by Saker Analytics, LLC under the Creative Commons CC-BY-SA 4.0 International license (creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0). For permission to re-publish or otherwise use non-original or non-licensed content, please consult the respective source of the content.